196 Comments
  • 196 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
Posted by ComradeCrash

Uh that wasn't eight minutes. lol

Edited by BaconGames

I was hesitant to watch this because I was anticipating Brad just rushing through and dying over and over again but this is a rather methodical and leisurely take on it, which is much more pleasant to watch. Helps that it's Vinny and Drew just shooting the shit with Brad.

EDIT: Seems they fixed the title, good on 'em. Chris Watters is still a wonderful man. Honestly him and Shaun McGinnis are 1 and 2 for GS for me and that's pretty much it. Even if I disagree, I just respect them so much as personalities I would give them the time of day. Everyone else? Eh. Actually I would have also have said John Davison but he's not been at GS for a little bit now.

Posted by Geo4690

Voxel. $8000 well spent.

Posted by DefaultProphet

Oh man I didn't notice on the livestream but that tikitrap totally killed the Queen Bee! HE WAS RUNNING AND PANICKING FOR NOTHING

Posted by Korosuzo

I'm sure I'll come off as being a prick but man I had to stop watching after the 12 minute mark when he decided to save his money rather than buy one of the best items in the game aka the cape. What are you saving your money for?!

Posted by grbear

It's not worth it Brad. This game is evil.

Posted by doe3879

@grbear: is this worth watching tho?

I never did like the older breaking brad videos...then again i'm not into call of duty. What am I even saying, focuz i'm gona watch this either way.

Posted by BadNews

How can Vinny be so awesome? Also Brad. Always use to think Brad was a stick in the mud but he continues to surprise me by being awesome.

Also Breaking Brad Dark Souls. That game would be amazing to watch one of the giant bomb crew just survive. When Ryan started it up for the one tricaster stream I was pretty much like a kid in a candy store.

Posted by Nicked

@BadNews said:

Also Breaking Brad Dark Souls. That game would be amazing to watch one of the giant bomb crew just survive. When Ryan started it up for the one tricaster stream I was pretty much like a kid in a candy store.

I'd definitely like to see that too!

Posted by DoomGuitar

Why didn't they put this on Twitch or YouTube? Videos have been loading way too slow for me off of Giant Bomb lately for some reason.

Posted by Sweetz

@Abendlaender said:

Next time on Breaking Brad: FTL

You know you want it Brad! Come get it!

That would be great and also realistically achievable. Over the course of 16 hours spent with the game I went from "this is unbeatable BS!" to being able to win pretty much 90% of the time on Easy, and about 50% of the time on Normal, based on how lucky I am with my trip there.

Posted by beeryayghost

@DoomGuitar said:

Why didn't they put this on Twitch or YouTube? Videos have been loading way too slow for me off of Giant Bomb lately for some reason.

It's subscriber only. If they put it on Twitch or YT, non-subscribers would be able to access it.

Posted by pwnmachine

If Brad is trying to finish this game in 8 minute shouldn't he be trying to find the exit asap instead of collecting loot?

Posted by a_beluga_whale

Just want to give a big thanks to Vinny, Brad, Drew, Alexis and Dave for this weeks insane, amazing content. Fucking fantastic job guys!

Posted by HerbieBug

Brad gets too attached to bonus items.

Posted by Sankis

Brad needs to stop hoarding. It's frustrating to watch him do stupid things in favor of using a single bomb! Items aren't that important.

Posted by ChrisTaran

@pwnmachine said:

If Brad is trying to finish this game in 8 minute shouldn't he be trying to find the exit asap instead of collecting loot?

He isn't. He's going for the Ironman achievement that just requires he finish the game without shortcuts.

http://www.giantbomb.com/achievements/ironman/196855/

Posted by NorthernBoreus

@ChrisTaran said:

@pwnmachine said:

If Brad is trying to finish this game in 8 minute shouldn't he be trying to find the exit asap instead of collecting loot?

He isn't. He's going for the Ironman achievement that just requires he finish the game without shortcuts.

http://www.giantbomb.com/achievements/ironman/196855/

The title used to say "Spelunky in 8 Minutes," but they corrected it to reflect the Achievement that Brad was actually going for.

Posted by triviaman09

I love how the music goes all out of key when the ghost appears.

Posted by RenegadeSaint

I have not played this game, but still found this really frustrating to watch. Now I have to buy the game and try for myself and then when I'm worse than Brad, I can feel an appropriate amount of shame for judging him.

Online
Posted by Maajin

This week was the best week. Goodbye best week.

Posted by Duffyside

I thought Ryan was supposed to come back this week?

Posted by Manhattan_Project

@NoelVeiga said:

I may get some crap for this, but this BB exposed why I don't like Spelunky much very starkly. Brad didn't get any better at it over time, he got more info about the game in the last 10 minutes just talking about it than seemingly in his whole experience playing the game and random crap killed him a bunch of times while he was doing not much different from what had kept him alive until then.

The time limit for the ghost is also detracting from exploration and the time for a retry (and the randomization) mean that methodically exploring is annoying and inconsistent. It has none of the reliable results and strategies in FTL or Binding of Isaac AND none of the quick restarting and checkpointing from Super Meat Boy.

It's not a terrible game by any means, but it's just not as gripping as FTL, Binding of Isaac, Super Meat Boy, Legend of Grimrock, XCOM, Dark Souls or any of the other games that played around with persistence and randomization these last couple of years.

First, trying to say that Spelunky does it wrong while praising FTL which does literally the exact same thing is ridiculous.

Secondly, Brad didn't get any better because he did what he always does: He continued to play the same way despite repeatedly dying.

Simple, little things like not always carrying around a rock to throw at enemies or drop in front of arrow traps, not running through spikes, leaving behind crates because he didn't want to "waste" a bomb even though crates ALWAYS have ropes or bombs and occasionally a random equippable item. And he missed a couple of in-the-open crates because he simply wasn't paying attention.

Most people change this stuff within a couple of hours of playing but Brad keeps doing his own thing instead. Its the same thing that happened to him in Trials Evo with not knowing how to bunny hop (the essential thing in that game).

None of the stuff that Chris Watters told him about are necessary to beat Spelunky. I knew almost none of it when I first beat it. What Brad needs to do is exactly what Chris said at the end. Pay more attention to the game in general, be ultra aware of all the things that can kill him and, most importantly, he needs to actually change the way he plays.

That being said, this Breaking Brad was probably my favorite. Looking forward to the next one where he will (hopefully) change this stuff. Or not. Its still fun watching him discover new ways of dying.

Edited by pyrodactyl

@Sweetz said:

@Abendlaender said:

Next time on Breaking Brad: FTL

You know you want it Brad! Come get it!

That would be great and also realistically achievable. Over the course of 16 hours spent with the game I went from "this is unbeatable BS!" to being able to win pretty much 90% of the time on Easy, and about 50% of the time on Normal, based on how lucky I am with my trip there.

my only successful run on normal in FTL took me 2 or 3 hours. I'm not even counting the 3 or 4 times I got to the flagship, each taking more than 2 hours. To complete FTL on normal you need to explore each system as much as you can and pause in combat very very very often. FTL is also much more focus intensive than CoD4 or geometry wars. So talking while playing means certain doom since it diverts your attention away from the game.

So if Brad plays FTL, he will:

  • Ignore/not understand half the systems resulting in certain death
  • Talk while playing diverting his attention away from the game and die
  • Try to keep things moving and not pause as much as he should resulting in his death
  • If and it's a HUGE IF he reachs the flagship (1h30 minimum) he will certainly die on the second form, crushing all his hopes and dreams in 20 seconds.

Short version: this is a very bad idea.

Posted by Nameless2000

Unlocking the shortcuts is a really good way to practice this game. I don't think Brad will be able to get this achievement without spending a lot of time in World 3 and 4.

Posted by bunkerbuster05

5 seconds in, I love it.

Posted by blueinferno

@pyrodactyl said:

@Sweetz said:

@Abendlaender said:

Next time on Breaking Brad: FTL

You know you want it Brad! Come get it!

That would be great and also realistically achievable. Over the course of 16 hours spent with the game I went from "this is unbeatable BS!" to being able to win pretty much 90% of the time on Easy, and about 50% of the time on Normal, based on how lucky I am with my trip there.

my only successful run on normal in FTL took me 2 or 3 hours. I'm not even counting the 3 or 4 times I got to the flagship, each taking more than 2 hours. To complete FTL on normal you need to explore each system as much as you can and pause in combat very very very often. FTL is also much more focus intensive than CoD4 or geometry wars. So talking while playing means certain doom since it diverts your attention away from the game.

So if Brad plays FTL, he will:

  • Ignore/not understand half the systems resulting in certain death
  • Talk while playing diverting his attention away from the game and die
  • Try to keep things moving and not pause as much as he should resulting in his death
  • If and it's a HUGE IF he reachs the flagship (1h30 minimum) he will certainly die on the second form, crushing all his hopes and dreams in 20 seconds.

Short version: this is a very bad idea.

So what you're saying is...it's such a bad idea that it's also a good idea?

Posted by PatchMaster

This is too good. There needs to be a part two.

In fact, I think I may have to go back and finally take down Olmec now.

Posted by Jedted

Anyone else have the video cut off near the end?  Did they not record the whole stream? 

Posted by Mr_JPeps

This is one of my 2012 Games of the Year! I was sad when it didn't see much love from the GB crew in the GOTY stuff, but watching Brad bang his head against it & taking a beating, sure is making me hope they will make more of these. Doing a "no short cut run" is possible, just takes time with the game and it's strict systems. Should make for some great content in Breaking Brad!

Posted by NoelVeiga

@Manhattan_Project said:

First, trying to say that Spelunky does it wrong while praising FTL which does literally the exact same thing is ridiculous.

Secondly, Brad didn't get any better because he did what he always does: He continued to play the same way despite repeatedly dying.

I already addressed the FTL thing, but since this got kinda big, here's the short version: In FTL you only ever die in battles, and you can reliably strategize for those based on your loadout (including running away). In Spelunky everything and anything can kill you from off-screen at a moment's notice.

There are other minor reasons why FTL is way less unwieldy or restrictive about its learning process: it has an Easy mode, in which it's not hard at all to reach the boss fight (but it's just as hard to beat it), it has an achievement system bound to unlocks, so it encourages players to try different ships and loadouts, which in turn teaches players what works when... It's just easier to explore and learn in it.

Also, about the second point, I don't know that's true about either Brad or Spelunky. the truth is Spelunky is not a very readable game. Even after a lot of playtime I keep finding it hard to spot arrow traps or to figure out their range. The game also has no means to indicate to Brad that he's playing "wrong" other than killing him and killing him seems to also be the way the game indicates that he's playing right. Once the physics are allowed to take over, you die out of nowhere, so how are you supposed to parse what was your fault and what was the game just being an asshole?

Brad may have a tendency to not try different things on BB's (which is probably out of a time limitation, he's played these games before and his pet peeves are often formed off camera), but Spelunky is a game that doesn't teach itself very well, too, and that's a design problem.

Posted by xite

They need a video production intern or something so Drew and Vinny can be in more videos.

Posted by Abendlaender
@pyrodactyl
I'm not entirely sure if you understand what Breaking Brad is about....
Posted by Nictel

This video breaks my shockwave player every few minutes :-(. Could it be a size problem or something else?

Posted by Addfwyn

This makes me want to see them do a Binding of Isaac TNT or Breaking Brad...

Posted by Gordy

I love Chris admonishing Brad for his stupid mistake right at the end.

Posted by Vrikk

I love this game.

Posted by Manhattan_Project

@NoelVeiga said:

@Manhattan_Project said:

First, trying to say that Spelunky does it wrong while praising FTL which does literally the exact same thing is ridiculous.

Secondly, Brad didn't get any better because he did what he always does: He continued to play the same way despite repeatedly dying.

I already addressed the FTL thing, but since this got kinda big, here's the short version: In FTL you only ever die in battles, and you can reliably strategize for those based on your loadout (including running away). In Spelunky everything and anything can kill you from off-screen at a moment's notice.

There are other minor reasons why FTL is way less unwieldy or restrictive about its learning process: it has an Easy mode, in which it's not hard at all to reach the boss fight (but it's just as hard to beat it), it has an achievement system bound to unlocks, so it encourages players to try different ships and loadouts, which in turn teaches players what works when... It's just easier to explore and learn in it.

Also, about the second point, I don't know that's true about either Brad or Spelunky. the truth is Spelunky is not a very readable game. Even after a lot of playtime I keep finding it hard to spot arrow traps or to figure out their range. The game also has no means to indicate to Brad that he's playing "wrong" other than killing him and killing him seems to also be the way the game indicates that he's playing right. Once the physics are allowed to take over, you die out of nowhere, so how are you supposed to parse what was your fault and what was the game just being an asshole?

Brad may have a tendency to not try different things on BB's (which is probably out of a time limitation, he's played these games before and his pet peeves are often formed off camera), but Spelunky is a game that doesn't teach itself very well, too, and that's a design problem.

Everything you just said about FTL is almost the complete opposite of what I hear people saying.

FTL can kill of one of your crew (in multiple ways) within seconds of starting your game and you're completely fucked. This is the way rogue-likes work. They are random, they give you all the tools and make you go out and figure it out for yourself, and you can never completely prepare for them. Your only hope is to learn all the different ways you can be fucked, learn to minimize their effect, and then hope you have luck on your side. Ultimately, they all teach you by killing you.

And I find it hard to describe "easy" mode as easy. In fact its almost always decribed as "not as impossible as normal, but still hard as hell." I'm pretty sure none of the GB crew have even come close to beating "easy" mode.

It sounds to me like you've just spent way more time in FTL. Enough time to know all the little details that help you survive.

Posted by Drebin_893

Breaking Brad's probably my favourite Premium feature. This was fantastic.

Posted by NoelVeiga

@Manhattan_Project said:

Everything you just said about FTL is almost the complete opposite of what I hear people saying.

FTL can kill of one of your crew (in multiple ways) within seconds of starting your game and you're completely fucked. This is the way rogue-likes work. They are random, they give you all the tools and make you go out and figure it out for yourself, and you can never completely prepare for them. Your only hope is to learn all the different ways you can be fucked, learn to minimize their effect, and then hope you have luck on your side. Ultimately, they all teach you by killing you.

And I find it hard to describe "easy" mode as easy. In fact its almost always decribed as "not as impossible as normal, but still hard as hell." I'm pretty sure none of the GB crew have even come close to beating "easy" mode.

It sounds to me like you've just spent way more time in FTL. Enough time to know all the little details that help you survive.

What? No. First of all, no, FTL won't randomly kill one of your crew, they can only die in combat situations or through a few of the random events, which are always optional (the choice with a chance to kill or reward is always alongside one to ignore the choice altogether). Even when it does, though, FTL only needs one crew member for you to be able to keep on playing successfully, everybody else just adds bonuses, and you can get crew members during the game.

FTL is also more intelligent than Spelunky about how it uses its randomness in that it has two sets of overlapping mechanics: combat and exploration.

Now I'm getting into the granular stuff, which is a bit beyond the argument, but in FTL you never, ever, EVER just up and die from a random event. It randomizes what you encounter and the layout, but no random event just up and blows up your ship. You die in combat, and combat is strategic and manageable. This means that you get the exploration feel from jumping into a system and not knowing what's there, but the predictability of knowing how to handle combat.

In fact, combat ramps up in difficulty linearly. It's a ruthless difficulty curve, but it's always the same one. The main balance of the game is whether you're going to min/max your ship's upgrades fast enough to be able to beat the boss. The answer, most of the time, is no, you aren't.

But that's not my problem with Spelunky. It's not that it's hard (or that it's manageable until it gets really hard at the end, like FTL). The problem is the feedback for it. After a match in FTL I know if drones are working for me. I know if I like missiles or not. I know whether cloaking is worth the money.

In Spelunky, the gloves or the cape may be better or worse than the shotgun, but I can't make that call reliably because it doesn't matter which I'm carrying, I can still blind-fall on a pit of spikes or get an unlucky bounce off an enemy and lose all my hearts. You are right, all games that play on randomization teach you by showing you what doesn't work through death... only Spelunky doesn't teach you much. You don't learn a lot from getting bumped by a snake into an arrow trap and dying because all that teaches you is "learn to not be hit by snakes and hope there are no arrow traps near when you fail to do that".

I mean, you're right, I spent less time on Spelunky than on FTL and Binding of Isaac... but that's because Spelunky didn't engage me the way those did. I walked away from Spelunky after a couple of sessions because I didn't feel I was getting better, learning cool stuff or being encouraged to try new things. I stuck to FTL and BoI because they both did that effectively. Especially Binding of Isaac, which I had discarded as a buggy mess resulting from a game jam and was ready to play once and ignore forever, ended up becoming one of my most played games on Steam through sheer design quality on its use of randomization and difficulty balance cleverly. Spelunky isn't bad, like I said before, but it definitely doesn't nail that same balance nearly as well, either.

Posted by Manhattan_Project

@NoelVeiga said:

@Manhattan_Project said:

Everything you just said about FTL is almost the complete opposite of what I hear people saying.

FTL can kill of one of your crew (in multiple ways) within seconds of starting your game and you're completely fucked. This is the way rogue-likes work. They are random, they give you all the tools and make you go out and figure it out for yourself, and you can never completely prepare for them. Your only hope is to learn all the different ways you can be fucked, learn to minimize their effect, and then hope you have luck on your side. Ultimately, they all teach you by killing you.

And I find it hard to describe "easy" mode as easy. In fact its almost always decribed as "not as impossible as normal, but still hard as hell." I'm pretty sure none of the GB crew have even come close to beating "easy" mode.

It sounds to me like you've just spent way more time in FTL. Enough time to know all the little details that help you survive.

What? No. First of all, no, FTL won't randomly kill one of your crew, they can only die in combat situations or through a few of the random events, which are always optional (the choice with a chance to kill or reward is always alongside one to ignore the choice altogether). Even when it does, though, FTL only needs one crew member for you to be able to keep on playing successfully, everybody else just adds bonuses, and you can get crew members during the game.

FTL is also more intelligent than Spelunky about how it uses its randomness in that it has two sets of overlapping mechanics: combat and exploration.

Now I'm getting into the granular stuff, which is a bit beyond the argument, but in FTL you never, ever, EVER just up and die from a random event. It randomizes what you encounter and the layout, but no random event just up and blows up your ship. You die in combat, and combat is strategic and manageable. This means that you get the exploration feel from jumping into a system and not knowing what's there, but the predictability of knowing how to handle combat.

In fact, combat ramps up in difficulty linearly. It's a ruthless difficulty curve, but it's always the same one. The main balance of the game is whether you're going to min/max your ship's upgrades fast enough to be able to beat the boss. The answer, most of the time, is no, you aren't.

But that's not my problem with Spelunky. It's not that it's hard (or that it's manageable until it gets really hard at the end, like FTL). The problem is the feedback for it. After a match in FTL I know if drones are working for me. I know if I like missiles or not. I know whether cloaking is worth the money.

In Spelunky, the gloves or the cape may be better or worse than the shotgun, but I can't make that call reliably because it doesn't matter which I'm carrying, I can still blind-fall on a pit of spikes or get an unlucky bounce off an enemy and lose all my hearts. You are right, all games that play on randomization teach you by showing you what doesn't work through death... only Spelunky doesn't teach you much. You don't learn a lot from getting bumped by a snake into an arrow trap and dying because all that teaches you is "learn to not be hit by snakes and hope there are no arrow traps near when you fail to do that".

I mean, you're right, I spent less time on Spelunky than on FTL and Binding of Isaac... but that's because Spelunky didn't engage me the way those did. I walked away from Spelunky after a couple of sessions because I didn't feel I was getting better, learning cool stuff or being encouraged to try new things. I stuck to FTL and BoI because they both did that effectively. Especially Binding of Isaac, which I had discarded as a buggy mess resulting from a game jam and was ready to play once and ignore forever, ended up becoming one of my most played games on Steam through sheer design quality on its use of randomization and difficulty balance cleverly. Spelunky isn't bad, like I said before, but it definitely doesn't nail that same balance nearly as well, either.

So you sucked at the second to second gameplay the first couple of times playing Spelunky and just quit. Great. thats like me say the combat in FTL is terrible and never teaches me because the first ten times I played it I sucked at the combat.

And there are multiple situations where your party members can die because of a random event and maybe you're just better at FTL, but if I don't have at least two guys left, I ain't making it very far. I'm pretty sure that applies to most people.

Posted by NoelVeiga

@Manhattan_Project: Now you're just trolling. But hey, I have the answer to this here somewhere. Sorry for quoting myself, but I wrote this about Spelunky here way before we had this conversation:

"I feel that we're getting to a point where "hardcore gamers" aren't allowed to take issue with any design decisions on masocore games, lest they be accused of being one of the noob-kind. Spelunky may be hard and unforgiving, but it's also twitchy, punishing, hard to read and frustratingly repetitive. Randomized levels and high difficulty aren't enough to make a game good, and this re-release comes just short of the brilliance in Binding of Isaac or Super Meat Boy."

I still think that. You're claiming that I didn't find Spelunky to be great because I'm not good at the game.

That's... not the case. I've played other games in the vein of Spelunky, from Super Meat Boy to Shank or N+. I'm no stranger to hard side scrollers, I just don't think Spelunky is the best one of those you can go play right now. I've already explained why.

Posted by Manhattan_Project

@NoelVeiga said:

@Manhattan_Project: Now you're just trolling. But hey, I have the answer to this here somewhere. Sorry for quoting myself, but I wrote this about Spelunky here way before we had this conversation:

"I feel that we're getting to a point where "hardcore gamers" aren't allowed to take issue with any design decisions on masocore games, lest they be accused of being one of the noob-kind. Spelunky may be hard and unforgiving, but it's also twitchy, punishing, hard to read and frustratingly repetitive. Randomized levels and high difficulty aren't enough to make a game good, and this re-release comes just short of the brilliance in Binding of Isaac or Super Meat Boy."

I still think that. You're claiming that I didn't find Spelunky to be great because I'm not good at the game.

That's... not the case. I've played other games in the vein of Spelunky, from Super Meat Boy to Shank or N+. I'm no stranger to hard side scrollers, I just don't think Spelunky is the best one of those you can go play right now. I've already explained why.

No I'm saying you didn't spend enough time to actually be able to pass judgement on any of the systems.

Posted by aceofspudz

I started dying of laughter when it all went wrong for him around 47m.

Posted by Kevin_Cogneto

@NoelVeiga said:

Now I'm getting into the granular stuff, which is a bit beyond the argument, but in FTL you never, ever, EVER just up and die from a random event. [...] In Spelunky, the gloves or the cape may be better or worse than the shotgun, but I can't make that call reliably because it doesn't matter which I'm carrying, I can still blind-fall on a pit of spikes or get an unlucky bounce off an enemy and lose all my hearts. You are right, all games that play on randomization teach you by showing you what doesn't work through death... only Spelunky doesn't teach you much. You don't learn a lot from getting bumped by a snake into an arrow trap and dying because all that teaches you is "learn to not be hit by snakes and hope there are no arrow traps near when you fail to do that".

At the risk of sticking my nose into this argument, neither of those examples you cite is a random event. You are responsible for getting hit by that snake, you're the one who jumped down the pit without knowing what was at the bottom. The game randomly generated the level, but you're the one who failed to navigate it.

I agree with 100%, you're at the mercy of randomness in FTL far more than you are in Spelunky. The bombs and ropes in Spelunky are always there to get you out of a jam if the randomly generated level has screwed you. If you encounter a drop you think is too dangerous to jump down, you can use a rope and slowly climb down, or you can find a place to bomb through the floor. You have the tools in Spelunky to assert your will upon the randomness.

In FTL, I've had playthroughs where I encountered two supernovas back-to-back in the first sector, and my ship simply wasn't equipped to deal with it. In that case, the game hasn't given me the tools to overcome its randomness -- no matter how good you are at the game, sometimes there's just nothing you can do except die. That's simply not true of Spelunky.

Online
Posted by Luck702

I just bought premium for this. When I first wandered in to Giant Bomb back in July, I scoffed at the idea of paying for a premium account to game review site. 5 months later, I've truly realized how much quality you guys put into everything on here and how much you guys deserve my money as well as my time. I really do love you guys, keep up the great work Bomb-crew! c:

Posted by NoelVeiga

@Manhattan_Project said:

@NoelVeiga said:

@Manhattan_Project: Now you're just trolling. But hey, I have the answer to this here somewhere. Sorry for quoting myself, but I wrote this about Spelunky here way before we had this conversation:

"I feel that we're getting to a point where "hardcore gamers" aren't allowed to take issue with any design decisions on masocore games, lest they be accused of being one of the noob-kind. Spelunky may be hard and unforgiving, but it's also twitchy, punishing, hard to read and frustratingly repetitive. Randomized levels and high difficulty aren't enough to make a game good, and this re-release comes just short of the brilliance in Binding of Isaac or Super Meat Boy."

I still think that. You're claiming that I didn't find Spelunky to be great because I'm not good at the game.

That's... not the case. I've played other games in the vein of Spelunky, from Super Meat Boy to Shank or N+. I'm no stranger to hard side scrollers, I just don't think Spelunky is the best one of those you can go play right now. I've already explained why.

No I'm saying you didn't spend enough time to actually be able to pass judgement on any of the systems.

Well played sir. My rebuttal: I'm saying I did spend enough time to be able to pass judgement.

We seem to have reached an impasse, unless you're willing to crack open the dreaded "I'm rubber, you're glue" counterargument.

@Kevin_Cogneto said:

At the risk of sticking my nose into this argument, neither of those examples you cite is a random event. You are responsible for getting hit by that snake, you're the one who jumped down the pit without knowing what was at the bottom. The game randomly generated the level, but you're the one who failed to navigate it.

I agree with 100%, you're at the mercy of randomness in FTL far more than you are in Spelunky. The bombs and ropes in Spelunky are always there to get you out of a jam if the randomly generated level has screwed you. If you encounter a drop you think is too dangerous to jump down, you can use a rope and slowly climb down, or you can find a place to bomb through the floor. You have the tools in Spelunky to assert your will upon the randomness.

In FTL, I've had playthroughs where I encountered two supernovas back-to-back in the first sector, and my ship simply wasn't equipped to deal with it. In that case, the game hasn't given me the tools to overcome its randomness -- no matter how good you are at the game, sometimes there's just nothing you can do except die. That's simply not true of Spelunky.

No, please, do stick your nose. I think we've established that the other path is well and truly spent.

You are right in that the behaviour of the snake isn't random, only its placement is, but the placement of enemies in hard to see places, offscreen hazards and other similar things has been regarded as bad design in platformers for ages. The fact that Spelunky is procedurally generating these doesn't let it off the hook in my book, bad level design is bad level design, be it done by a man or a computer.

That said, the way it handles random level design isn't Spelunky's only problem. Its controls are fast but a bit twitchy, and it has this sharp, jarring moment when you go from being in control of your character to being entirely at the mercy of the physics engine that is very annoying, as it tends to send you pinballing into hazards.

FTL definitely has situations where your loadout can't deal with the situation, and not every situation is beatable, but I feel you guys are painting a picture of unwieldy mechanics here entirely for the sake of argument (you hear this a lot on GOTY discussions, famously from Brad, right?). FTL does have multiple ways of dealing with overpowering odds, the best being... well, overpowering them through maximizing damage output and improving the ship, but there is also the option to escape fights. And, frankly, not calling you out on your statement, but I've played a fair bit of FTL and I've never been in that scenario, really.

But forget FTL for a second, I only mentioned it because I genuinely think it's better designed. Perhaps the best example of Spelunky done right is the other game I've been talking about instead. Binding of Isaac also has second to second skill-based gameplay, and it doesn't feel nearly as twitchy and random as Spelunky does. My point is still the same, and it holds regardless of what you think of FTL.

Posted by lurkingsalt

Breaking Brad Doom is what made me sign up for Premium. Glad the pain games content is still being made. I love this damn site.

Posted by ptys

Gotta do a Breaking Brad Mass Effect Insanity playthrough!

Posted by PimblyCharles

@ptys said:

Gotta do a Breaking Brad Mass Effect Insanity playthrough!

oh my god... please no

  • 196 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4